You have to be an editor to have any say on Wiki. They'll delete or change entries how they want. They also store ip addresses which is an infringement of personal data protection, I asked them to remove them and they didn't, and it would take legal action to get them to remove it. I added an entry which they deleted and then added similar information. Wiki editors are control freaks. I've found them to be biased, and editors don't have good analysis skills.

The head of Wiki seems to be a freeloader who travels a lot because he attends conferences around the world.

Wiki's not neutral like it claims to be.

Um, Wiki is actually the name of type of website, Mediawiki is the name of the particular implementation of the Wiki idea, Wikinews is a site based on mediawiki.

If you don't want your IP address publicised, you can create an account.

I am a wiki editor myself and to suggest that there is censorship of any kind is absolutetly nonsense.

Wiki has editors from all over the World, actually the editors from America are a minority, I suppose you will now shout that of a Mossad CiA conspiracy, but anyway...

...for the clarification. now that i know that observer is a 'wiki editor', i will stay well away from the mediawiki site.

wiki media reports change as people change them. That means their content is easily hijacked to suit the agendas of the powerful, as they can employ or brainwash people into continually monitoring wiki pages to their own ends.

A perfect example of this is how the fascist, violent LaRouche cult has systematically removed all criticism of LaRouche from the wikipedia article on them ( you can see this happening in their history pages ).

However, this criticism is equally valid when applied to any website - especially IndyMedia itself, just do a search to see how many LaRouchies post disinformation here. A small cult or powerful person can easily distort any 'independent media' reports to their favour. There are sweat-shop factories of employees paid to sit in front of PCs spouting the party/company/government line, and many of them post here as well as on wiki sites.

The main solution to this is to treat ALL media as suspect as you treat the mainstream press and to contribute more yourself. A secondary technical solution to this is to allow people to filter out reports from known cult members. It's too late as far as the LaRouchies or the Moonies go - their 'news' fronts are already accepted by Google as valid news sources.

wiki media reports change as people change them. That means their content is easily hijacked to suit the agendas of the powerful, as they can employ or brainwash people into continually monitoring wiki pages to their own ends.

A perfect example of this is how the fascist, violent LaRouche cult has systematically removed all criticism of LaRouche from the wikipedia article on them ( you can see this happening in their history pages ).

However, this criticism is equally valid when applied to any website - especially IndyMedia itself, just do a search to see how many LaRouchies post disinformation here. A small cult or powerful person can easily distort any 'independent media' reports to their favour. There are sweat-shop factories of employees paid to sit in front of PCs spouting the party/company/government line, and many of them post here as well as on wiki sites.

The main solution to this is to treat ALL media as suspect as you treat the mainstream press and to contribute more yourself. A secondary technical solution to this is to allow people to filter out reports from known cult members. It's too late as far as the LaRouchies or the Moonies go - their 'news' fronts are already accepted by Google as valid news sources.

"There are sweat-shop factories of employees paid to sit in front of PCs spouting the party/company/government line, and many of them post here as well as on wiki sites." - Danny

Fascinating. Can you back that up? Any references to credible sources anywhere? You know, something more than just someone's speculation on a message board or personal blog.

If it's true, it's a fantastic conspiracy. They've been jolly good at keeping those thousands of employees quiet.

And of course, so much more likely than the idea that people post dissenting comments on websites because they actually disagree.

Its's no conspiracy, that' just modern life for you. Sorry to dissuade you of the opinion that everyone on the internet is who they seem to be, but that 17 year old beauty you've been emailing is actually my granny.

"They" haven't always been very good at keeping their employees quiet - but they do try and they do succeed. "They" of course are a wide and disparate bunch of organisations aiming to achieve different objectives, but their activities have been heralded. For example, after "911" thousands of 'patriotic' Madison Avenue executives volunteered for 'service' in various US propaganda outlets, most of them posting on websites such as this, and for the most part they were either obvious or honest about their goals. Not many references to that on the Internet now - there was at the time but funnily enough most of them have since disappeared. You can still find evidence in the relevant marketing sites if you search for more than a minute but spoon-feeding you links isn't evidence.

I'm assuming you find that easy to believe and to verify even if you didn't notice it at the time, so given one organisation (the US government) behave duplicitiously in this manner, do you think no one else does it ? Would me doing your own homework for you by pointing you to sites that you should be able to find prove anything ?

Given that sweatshops exist where employees play online games to exchange virtual items for real cash can you really be so naive to assume that the same set-ups don't also profit their owners in other ways ?

"And of course, so much more likely than the idea that people post dissenting comments on websites because they actually disagree."
Genuine people post genuine posts, whatever my opinion of their views I welcome them. The LaRouche cultists who have obviously hijacked the LaRouche wikipedia page genuinely believe that LaRouche is a worthy intellect that we should all bow down to, the Moonies genuinely believe that the Rev. Moon is a living deity. Unfortunately these genuine idiots rarely declare their allegience and oft times are trained to avoid 'blowback'. People just lie sometimes, isn't that fantastic ?

And if you too dislike cults masquerading as free thinkers fouling our independent media, and only doubt that businesses also partake of the same tactic, then you presumabaly also think 'viral marketing' is a conspiracy theory rather than a standard business practice.

Welcome to the new century !

This is an issue about Wikinews rather than Wikipedia. The problem is that a small group of right-wing authoritarian nuts (like this guy:  http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Mrmiscellanious/Opinions#My_Beliefs.2FOpinions), or one person pretending to be several people (you never know with the internet) have got their hands on a little bit of "authoritaw" and are using it to aggressively obstruct any story that shows the US government in a bad light, blocking anyone who disagrees with them. See also:  http://journowiki.org/w/index.php/User:Chiacomo/Sandbox.

Interesting point about Larouche on Wikipedia - I can well believe it.

 http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Neutralizer&action=edit&section=2

is a list of edits delaying/preventing publishing of articles unfriendly toward US government,; just within the past few months; almost all by 1 administrator who never bothers other type articles

...Hypnotised has done the homework for us.

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/10/326553.html

"And of course, so much more likely than the idea that people post dissenting comments on websites because they actually disagree."
Indeed. I'm afraid a gay blade and rapier wit are no match for healthy skepticism.

Well, I never thought I'd see the day of stepping onto this load of crap website in order to defend Wikinews. So I'm not. I'm here to tell you that we have policies and regulations, unlike this site. Users who do not abide to them will be warned, and then blocked. Furthermore, this "article" was published by one of our more notorious vandals on our website. The only personal attacks ever dished out were by him. I'm quite disgusted by the immaturity of Cowicide above. Wikinews is not Indymedia - just keep that in mind.

Actually, as far as I know, no one from Cowicide actually made this initial post here. If I did it or anyone else did we'd be glad to take credit because I do stand by it anyway. But, just for the record, that's not really a Cow post unless someone did it without discussing it on our CowBoard.

Oh, and MrM... you are a lying piece of shit. You even managed to insult the people who made this site while vowing that you don't make personal attacks. You are such a fucking idiot. At wikinews, you most certainly did launch personal attacks and you continue to be a nasty asshole to anyone who doesn't walk your evil, conservative line at wikinews to this day. You are universally hated and I'm sure you love all the attention because you aren't intelligent enough to do anything with your life that could garner positive attention apparently. Was it your mother or your father that beat you down as a child, MrM? I don't know, something horrific must have happened to you as a child and I'm sorry for that. But you need counseling... not internet punching bags to get out all your aggression and regression with. Get help.

wikipedias Jimmy Wales slags off wikipedia. Now when he uses the phrase "non-free" it that free as free-speech or non-free as in beer ?



 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/79454/wikipedia-to-go-offline.html


'At a factual level it's unreliable, and the writing is often appalling,' he wrote. 'I wouldn't depend on it as a source, and I certainly wouldn't recommend it to a student writing a research paper.'

Wales agreed that the examples given by Carr were particularly unreliable.

'It is my intention that we aim at Britannica-or-better quality, period, free or non-free,' he replied. 'We should strive to be the best. But the two examples he puts forward are, quite frankly, a horrific embarrassment. '[[Bill Gates]] and [[Jane Fonda]] are nearly unreadable crap.'

Learn to read, Cowicide. It says right at the bottom of the "article" - "Cowicide". And yes, I do criticize this site. I do it because they let these types of "articles" be posted to their site - nothing but advertisements to "round a posse" and start attacking another website and person.

The only people I'm "hated" by "universally" are a few French citizens, and your immature "group". And I'm OK with that. Personally, I don't see your "group" as anything more but a single whining person complaining about the US Government.

Best wishes on the future. Oh, and did you know that Cox has a TOS against using multiple proxies for vandalism on websites such as Wikinews? Just something to think about.

By the way, in case you were wondering - we're all doing fine on Wikinews without you. Haven't missed you one bit. Breaks some heart, doesn't it?

Get a life. The more you start telling people their parents hit them as a child the way you do, the more people think you haven't even hit puberty yet. And why blame them? They're only observing what your actions speak to them.

> Learn to read, Cowicide. It says right at the bottom of the "article" - "Cowicide".

Learn to comprehend, Mr. MrMiscellanious. Must you prove over and over what a complete idiot you are? Go back and read what I said, idiot. Someone used the Cowicide name, but they were not from Cowicide as far as I can tell. We have an internal board to verify these things. Sorry, you aren't allowed on the board.

> And yes, I do criticize this site. I do it because they let these types of "articles" be posted to their site
> nothing but advertisements to "round a posse" and start attacking another website and person.

That's fine that you don't like the site based on your lie that indymedia does "nothing but" inspire others to attack people (as opposed to indymedia disseminating information or anything else like that). But, I guess you still don't get what a hypocrite you are... whining about personal attacks by others and espousing how you don't partake... while (laughably) launching (guess what?) personal attacks... in the same breath. Are you really this oblivious or just a troll?

> The only people I'm "hated" by "universally" are a few French citizens, and your immature "group".
> And I'm OK with that. Personally, I don't see your "group" as anything more but a single
> whining person complaining about the US Government.

Hey, look! You managed yet another lie. All anyone has to do is check out wikinews and see that you are the center of trouble there. I'll take your slant on Cowicide as a compliment. That one person must not require any sleep, ever... hahaha.... Which reminds me, MrM... when is the last time you stepped away from your computer? You are losing perspective, buddy... it would do you good to find friends to work with instead of trying to defend yourself on the internet constantly. The hilarious thing is, Cowicide doesn't care about you and didn't even make this post, it was someone or some other "group" out there that hates you. Then again, no one hates Mr.M but the "French", right? Hahaha... Well, MrM... if it's any consolation, Cowicide is indifferent to you and when you lose your power at wikinews you won't even be mentioned there anymore. How's that for a kick in the gut, attention freak?

> Best wishes on the future. Oh, and did you know that Cox has a TOS against using
> multiple proxies for vandalism on websites such as Wikinews? Just something to think about.

Hahahaha!!! Then I STRONGLY recommend that you get in contact with Cox IMMEDIATELY!!! Cox's phone number:  http://www.cox.com/support/selectlocation_contact.asp also  abuse@cox.net

Mr.M, you owe it to wikinews to call Cox NOW! Don't be a chickenhawk, Mr. M... get in the game! Make that phone call!! Email Cox!!! Do it NOW unless you are a WIMP. Oh, yeah... and your threats have never done anything to stop any of us... not even slow us down. It just gives a good laugh at your expense. Just something to think about. Dude, you are surrounded.

> By the way, in case you were wondering - we're all doing fine on Wikinews without you.
> Haven't missed you one bit. Breaks some heart, doesn't it?

Hahahaha!!! Ok, this is funniest part... Cowicide is STILL THERE at wikinews, you baffoon. We've been posting and editing right under your nose and we've even gotten more people in the last few weeks to head over there. Breaks some heart, doesn't it?

> Get a life. The more you start telling people their parents hit them as a child the way you do,
> the more people think you haven't even hit puberty yet. And why blame them?
> They're only observing what your actions speak to them.

Look, Mr.M, I was being serious. I really do think something horrible happened to you as a child. All anyone has to do is lurk at the wikinews site and observe your consistent, nasty tone with people to realize something went haywire with you early in life. I think it's sad that you've got to find out from the internet that it's time to get help and no friends around you in meatspace have offered help. Then again, if you stepped away from that computer every now and then, you might actually make more friends in the offline world that would help calm you down in the first place and get your life back in perspective. Go outside and get some fresh air. You can give those sore wrists and fingers a break and maybe trim down that ever growing gut of yours. Sign up for boxing, get a republican male hooker or something... you obviously have a lot of pent up aggression you need to get out.

Hoohoohahaha!!!!

 http://iamtv.tv

UPDATE: MrM has been banned from wikinews for a spell of time. Apparently, the "French" finally got tired of Mr. popular?

Update, MrM was stripped of his admin status in a vote by the community at wikinews. He decided to stopped contributing since he lost his admin status. It just shows that it never was about benefiting wikinews, it was a power trip on his part and a conservative agenda push via wikinews. Otherwise, he would gladly continue to contribute to wikinews despite having lost his admin status by the community. What a sore loser.